24 July 2018

Beginning August 2003 and ending May 2018 I had one or more short stories published each and every month. That’s 14 years and 10 months (178 consecutive months), and I know of no living short story writer who has come close to accomplishing a similar feat. (Edward D. Hoch accomplished something similar—and far more impressive—with a story in every issue of Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine beginning May 1973 and continuing through March/April 2009.)

The streak began with the August 2003 Hustler Fantasies, which contained “Married vs. Single” and “Slice of Heaven,” and ended with the May 2018 publication of the anthology A Wink and a Smile (Smoking Pen Press), which contained my story “Too Close to School.”

During this run, my stories were published in nearly every genre; in anthologies, magazines, and newsletters; electronically, in print, and in audiobooks; in several countries and in at least three languages. They appeared under my own byline, under a variety of pseudonyms, and, in the case of confessions, without any byline at all.

Excluding self-published work and those months when I had collections released, my best months were April 2008 and June 2012 (nine stories each); July 2006, December 2010, and November 2012 (eight stories each); and April 2011, May 2011, September 2011, November 2011, January 2012, and August 2014 (seven stories each).

During this multi-year streak, 132 stories appeared in True Story and 125 in True Confessions. My longest single-magazine run was 29 consecutive issues of True Story, which is only slightly longer than a previous run of 26 consecutive issues of the same magazine.

Thirteen times I had three stories published in a single issue. This happened most often with True Confessions (May 2012, July 2012, March 2017, and April 2017). I had three stories in three issues of Ruthie’s Club (June 19, 2006; July 17, 2006; and April 28, 2008); three stories in two issues of True Love (April 2011 and May 2011); and three stories in single issues of True Romance (March 2005), Black Confessions (August 2006), True Story (January 2012), and The Mammoth Book of Uniform Erotica (Running Press, 2015).

My wife can attest that I grew nervous as month-ends approached without anything published, and at least twice I had single-story months in which that month’s lone story was published only a few days before the month ended.

HOW I DID IT

If I can trust my personal blog, I first noticed this streak at the three-year mark in May 2006, and I began to pay attention to what was happening.

Because editors determine which stories to accept and which issues to put them in, this is a publication streak over which I had little control. Even so, there are a few things I did that helped maintain the streak once it began:

Maintained high productivity. The more stories I wrote and submitted, the greater the odds that I would publish regularly.

Targeted multiple genres. There aren’t enough paying markets in most genres to support a highly productive short story writer. So, I wrote in multiple genres.

Targeted multiple publications. Even within genres, I spread my work among multiple publications.

Wrote themed and seasonal stories. I wrote several stories tied to themes or seasons, thus producing stories most suitable for specific magazine issues. For example, I had good luck with New Year’s Eve stories (published in January), Valentine’s Day stories (February), St. Patrick’s Day stories (March), Halloween stories (October), Thanksgiving stories (November), and Christmas stories (December).

NOW WHAT?

As the streak lengthened, I began to believe I had control over it. I believed the sheer momentum of my achievement would propel it forward, and writing to the streak (themes and seasons!) would ensure its continuation.

It didn’t.

Editors changed. Markets disappeared. Anthologies tanked or missed scheduled publication dates. My productivity faltered. I can identify any number of reasons why the streak ended, but rather than assign blame for its end, I prefer to be amazed that it happened at all.

And now that the streak has ended, the pressure’s off. I no longer feel driven to write to the streak, and I wonder how that will impact my writing going forward.

The count starts over. With the July publication of “Good Girls Don’t” inPulp Modern(volume 2, issue 3), the publication of “Decision” in the Summer 2018 Flash Bang Mysteries, and the release of “Fissile Material” as a stand-alone audio release, I have now had one or more short stories published for one consecutive month.

12 November 2016

"The
grandest game in the world"--that's how Edward D. Hoch describes the
duel between mystery writer and mystery reader. In an essay called "The
Pleasure of the Short Story," Hoch explains why he prefers mysteries "in
which the reader is given a clue or hint well in advance of the ending.
As a reader myself I find the greatest satisfaction in spotting the
clue and anticipating the author. If I overlook it, I don't feel
cheated--I admire the author's skill!"*

And it takes a
lot of skill. In any mystery where this "grandest game" is played, the
delightful challenge offered to readers poses daunting challenges for
writers. We have to provide readers with clues "well in advance of the
ending," as Hoch says. In my opinion (and I bet Hoch would agree), we
should provide plenty of clues, and they should start as soon as
possible. As a reader, I feel a tad frustrated by mysteries that hinge
on a single clue--if we don't pick up on a quick reference indicating
the killer was wearing gloves on a warm day, we have no chance of
figuring things out. I also don't much enjoy mysteries that look like
whodunits but are really just histories of investigations.

The
detective questions A, who provides a scrap of information pointing to
B, who suggests talking to C. Finally, somewhere around F, the detective
happens upon the only truly relevant clue, which leads straight to a
solution that's obvious now but would have been impossible to guess even
three minutes sooner. That's not much fun.

But
working in lots of clues throughout the mystery isn't easy. Hoch
identifies "the great clue bugaboo" that plagues many detective stories:
"Clues are inserted with such a heavy hand that they almost scream
their presence at the reader." Especially in short stories, Hoch says,
avoiding that bugaboo requires "a great deal of finesse." I think that's
true not only in whodunits but also in mysteries that build suspense by
hinting at endings alert readers have a fair chance of predicting
before they reach the last page. Luckily, there are ways of camouflaging
clues, of hiding them in plain sight so most readers will overlook
them.

Here
are five camouflage techniques--you've probably used some or all of
them yourself. Since it wouldn't be polite to reveal other writers'
clues, I'll illustrate the descriptions with examples from my own
stories.That way, if I give away too much and spoil the stories, the
only person who can get mad at me is me. (By some strange coincidence,
all the stories I'll mention happen to be in my recent collection from
Wildside Press, Her Infinite Variety: Tales of Women and Crime.)

Sneak clues in before readers expect them:
Readers expect the beginning of a mystery to intrigue them and provide
crucial back story--or, perhaps, to plunge them into the middle of
action. They don't necessarily expect to be slapped in the face with
clues right away. So if we slide a clue into our opening sentences, it
might go unnoticed. That's what I tried to do in "Aunt Jessica's Party,"
which first appeared in Woman's World in 1993. It's not a
whodunit, but the protagonist's carrying out a scheme, and readers can
spot it if they pay attention. Here's how the story begins:

Carefully, Jessica polished her favorite sherry glass and placed it
on the silver tray. Soon, her nephew would arrive. He was to be the only
guest at her little party, and everything had to be perfect.
Five minutes until six--time to call Grace. She went to the phone near
the kitchen window, kept her eyes on the driveway, and dialed.
"Hello, Grace?" she said. "Jessica. How are you? Oh, I'm fine--never
better. Did I tell you William's coming today? Yes, it is an
accomplishment to get him here. But it's his birthday, and I promised
him a special present. He even agreed to pick up some sherry for me. Oh,
there he is, pulling into the driveway." She paused. "Goodbye, Grace.
You're a dear."

I
count at least six facts relevant to the story's solution in these
paragraphs; even Jessica's pause is significant. And there's one solid
clue, an oddity that should make readers wonder. Jessica's planned the
timing of this call ("time to call Grace"), but why call only five
minutes before her nephew's scheduled to arrive? She can't be calling to
chat--what other purpose might the call serve? I'm hoping that readers
won't notice the strange timing, that they'll focus instead on hints
about Jessica's relationship with her nephew and the "special present"
she's giving him. I've played fair by providing a major clue. If readers
aren't ready for it, it's not my fault.

Hide a clue in a series of insignificant details: If
a detective searches a crime scene and finds an important clue--an
oil-stained rag, say--we're obliged to tell readers. But if we don't
want to call too much attention to the clue, we can hide it in a list of
other things the detective finds, making sure some sound as intriguing
as an oil-stained rag. I used this technique in "Death in Rehab," a
whodunit published in Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine in
2011. When temporary secretary Leah Abrams accepts a job at a rehab
center, her husband, Sam, doesn't like the idea that she'll be
"surrounded by addicts." Leah counters that being around recovering
addicts will be inspirational, not dangerous, but Sam's not convinced:

"They're
still addicts, and addicts do dangerous things. Did you read the local
news this morning?" He found the right page and pointed to a headline.
"'Gambling Addict Embezzles Millions, Disappears'--probably in Vegas by
now, the paper says. Or this story--`Small-time Drug Dealer Killed
Execution Style'--probably because he stole from his bosses, the paper
says. Or this one--`Shooter Flies into Drunken Rage, Wounds Two'--the
police haven't caught that one, either."

Savvy
mystery readers may suspect one of these news stories will be relevant
to the mystery, but they can't yet know which one (this is another
early-in-the-story clue). In fact, I've tried to make the two irrelevant
headlines sound more promising than the one that actually matters--and
if you decide to read the story, that's a big extra hint for you. About
halfway through the story, Sam mentions the three news stories again. By
now, readers who have paid attention to all the clues provided during
Leah's first day at work should have a good sense of which story is
relevant. But I don't think most readers will figure out murderer and
motive yet--and if they do, I don't much care. I've packed this story so
full of clues that I doubt many readers will spot all of them. Even
readers who realize whodunit should find some surprises at the end.

Separate clues from context:
We're obliged to provide the reader with clues and also, I think, to
provide the context needed to interpret them. But I don't think we're
obliged to provide both at the same time. By putting a careful distance
between clue and context, we can play fair and still keep the reader
guessing. In "The Shopper," a whodunit first published in a 2014
convention anthology, a young librarian's house is burglarized while
she's at home, asleep. That's unsettling enough, but her real worries
begin when the burglar--a pro the police have nicknamed The
Shopper--starts sending her notes and returning some things he stole. He
seems obsessed with her. Also, two men she's never seen before--one
blond, one dark--start showing up at the library every day. She suspects
one of them might be The Shopper, but which one? (And who says you
can't have a puzzling whodunit with only two suspects?) Then things get
worse:

She
didn't really feel like going out that night, but she and Lori had a
long-standing date for dinner and a movie. It'd be embarrassing to admit
she was scared to go out, and the company would do her good. But when
she got to the restaurant, she spotted the blond man sitting in a booth,
eating a slab of pie. He has a right to eat wherever he wants, she
thought; but the minute Lori arrived, Diane grabbed her hand, pulled her
to a table at the other end of the restaurant, and sighed with relief
when the blond man left after a second cup of coffee.
The
relief didn't last long. As she and Lori walked out, she saw the dark
man sitting at the counter, picking at a salad. He must have come in
after she had--had he followed her? She couldn't stand it any more.

I'd
say there are five major clues in this story. Two are contained--or, in
one case, reinforced--in these paragraphs. A reader keeping careful
track of all the evidence could identify The Shopper right now, without
reading the remaining seven pages. But since these clues are revealing
only in the context of information provided five pages earlier, I'm
betting most readers won't make the connection. The Shopper's secrets
are still safe with me.

Use the protagonist's point of view to mislead readers: This technique isn't reserved for mystery writers. In "Emma
Considered as Detective Fiction," P.D. James comments on Jane Austen's
skillful manipulation of point of view to conceal the mysteries at the
heart of her novel. Emma constantly misinterprets what people do and
say, and because we readers see things from Emma's perspective, we're
equally oblivious to what's really going on. In our own mysteries,
unless our protagonist is a genius who instantly understands everything,
we can use the same technique: If our protagonist overlooks clues,
chances are readers will overlook them, too. In "A Joy Forever" (AHMM,
2015), photographer Chris is visiting Uncle Mike and his second wife,
Gwen. Uncle Mike is a tyrant who's reduced Gwen to the status of
domestic slave--he orders her around, never helps her, casually insults
her. Gwen takes it all without a murmur. After a dinner during which
Uncle Mike behaves even more boorishly than usual, Chris follows Gwen to
the kitchen to help with the dishes:

As I watched her standing at the sink, sympathy overpowered me again.
She was barely fifty but looked like an old woman--bent, scrawny,
exhausted, her graying hair pulled back in a tight bun. And her drab,
shapeless dress had to be at least a decade old.
"You spend
so much on Uncle Mike," I chided. "The golf cart, all that food and
liquor. Spend something on yourself. Go to a beauty parlor and have your
hair cut and styled. Buy yourself some new clothes."
She
laughed softly. "Oh, Mike really needs what I buy for him--he really,
really does. And I don't care how my hair looks, and I don't need new
clothes." Her smile hardened. "Not yet."
I felt so moved, and so sorry, that I leaned over and kissed the top of her head. "You're too good to him."

Chris
sees Gwen as a victim, as a woman whose spirit has been utterly crushed
by an oppressor. Readers who don't see beyond Chris's perspective have
some surprises coming. But in this story, by this point, I think most
readers will see more than Chris does. They'll pick up on clues such as
Gwen's hard smile, her quiet "not yet." I had fun playing with point of
view in this story, with giving alert readers plenty of opportunities to
stay one step ahead of the narrator. It's another variation on Hoch's
"grandest game."

Distract readers with action or humor:
If readers get caught up in an action scene, they may forget they're
supposed to be watching for clues; if they're chuckling at a character's
dilemma, they may not notice puzzle pieces slipping by. In "Table for
None" (AHMM, 2008), apprentice private detective Harriet Russo is
having a rough night. She's on a dark, isolated street, staking out a
suspect. But he spots her, threatens her, and stalks off. Moments later,
her client, Little Dave, pops up unexpectedly and proposes searching
the suspect's car. Harriet says it's too dangerous, but Little Dave
won't listen:

He
raced off. For a moment, I stood frozen. Call Miss Woodhouse and tell
her how I'd botched things--let Little Dave get himself killed and feel
guilty for the rest of my life--follow him into the parking lot and risk
getting killed myself. On the whole, the last option seemed most
attractive. I raced after Little Dave.
He stood next to the dirty white car, hissing into his cell phone. "Damn it, Terry," he whispered harshly, "I told you not to call me. No, I won't
tell you where I am. Just go home. I'll see ya when I see ya." He
snapped his phone shut and yanked on a back door of the car. It didn't
budge. He looked straight at me, grinning sheepishly.
That's
pretty much the last thing I remember. I have some vague impression of
something crashing down against me, of sharp pain and sudden darkness.
But my next definite memory is of fading slowly back into
consciousness--of hearing sirens blare, of feeling the cement against my
back, of seeing Little Dave sprawled a few feet away from me, of
spotting a small iron figurine next to him, of falling into darkness
again.

I hope readers will focus on the conflict and
confusion in this scene, and on the unseen attack that leaves Harriet
in bad shape and Little Dave in worse shape. I hope they won't pause to
take careful note of exactly what Little Dave says in his phone
conversation, to test it against the way he's behaved earlier and the
things people say later. If readers are too focused on the action to
pick up on inconsistencies, they'll miss evidence that could help them
identify the murderer.

We
can also distract readers with clever dialogue, with fascinating
characters, with penetrating social satire, with absorbing themes, with
keen insights into human nature. In the end, excellent writing is the
best way to keep readers from focusing only on the clues we parade past
them. Of course, that's not our main reason for trying to make our
writing excellent. To use Hoch's phrase again, mysteries invite writers
and readers to participate in "the grandest game," but that doesn't mean
mysteries are no more than a game. I think mysteries can be as
compelling and significant as other kinds of fiction. The grandest game
doesn't impose limits on what our stories and novels can achieve. It
simply adds another element that I and millions of other readers happen
to enjoy.

Do
you have favorite ways of camouflaging clues? I'd love to see some
examples from your own mysteries. (*Hoch's essay, by the way, is in the
Mystery Writers of America Mystery Writer's Handbook, edited by
Lawrence Treat, published in 1976, revised and reprinted several times
since then. Used copies are available through Amazon.)